Judgment : R. Banumathi, J. & T.S. Sivagnanam, J. 1. The petitioner, a Higher Secondary School, has filed this writ petition for issuance of a writ of Certiorari, to quash the order dated 17.10.2012 passed by the Private Schools Fee Determination Committee, respondent herein, as being illegal and to direct the committee to refix the fee as per the observations made by the Division Bench in W.P.No.28297 of 2011, dated 03.05.2012. 2. It is stated that the fee for the petitioner's school for the year 2010-11 was fixed by the Fee Determination Committee by order dated 07.10.2012 on the following terms:-Amount Classes (Rs.) LKG 1000 UKG 1000 I 2000 II 2000 III 2600 IV 2600 V 2600 VI 4100 Amount Classes (Rs.) VII 4100 VIII 4100 IX 5400 X 5400 XI 10000 XII 9500 3. The petitioner submitted their objection to the above fixation, and pursuant to the order passed by a Division Bench of this court on 05.10.2010, the matter once again went before the committee then headed by Justice K.Raviraja Pandian and the fee was fixed as per the following table excluding the fee for smart class:-Classes Fees (Rs.)LKG & UKG 6750 Std I-V 7500 Std VI-VIII 8550 Std IX & X 9400 Std XI & XII 11950 4. The petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P.No.28297 of 2011 and the Division bench permitted 15% enhancement to the fee fixed by the committee headed by Justice K.Raviraja Pandian. The fee with 15% increase is as follows:-Classes Fees (Rs.) LKG & 7765 UKG Std I-V 8625 Std VI-VIII 9835 Std IX & X 10810 Std XI & XII 13742 5. It is stated that the above fixation does not include the fee for smart class. 6. The petitioner is now aggrieved, by the order dated 17.10.2012, passed by the respondent committee fixing the fee for the year 2012-13, (inclusive of the smart class fees), which have been fixed as follows:-Classes Fees (Rs.) LKG & UKG 7500 Std I-V 8500 Std VI-VIII 9550 Std IX & X 10150 Classes Fees (Rs.) Std XI & XII 10500 7. The petitioner is now aggrieved, by the order dated 17.10.2012, passed by the respondent committee fixing the fee for the year 2012-13, (inclusive of the smart class fees), which have been fixed as follows:-Classes Fees (Rs.) LKG & UKG 7500 Std I-V 8500 Std VI-VIII 9550 Std IX & X 10150 Classes Fees (Rs.) Std XI & XII 10500 7. The order passed by the respondent committee has been challenged by the petitioner on several grounds, primarily on the ground that the fee fixed by the Committee in the impugned order is inclusive of the smart class fees and it is lesser than the fee fixed by the committee headed by Justice K.Raviraja Pandian with 15% increase as permitted by the Division Bench. Further, the amount of fees, which has been fixed for the smart class is far lower than the expenditure incurred by the petitioner for establishing and operating smart class rooms. 8. When the Writ Petition was heard on 14.6.2013 and 2.7.2013, Mr.P.Sanjay Gandhi, learned Additional Government Pleader accepted notice on behalf of the respondent and sought time to get instructions in the matter. Today, on instructions, Mr.P.Sanjay Gandhi, learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the fee fixed by the earlier Committee may not be taken for comparison and the present Committee has fixed the fee structure only based on the materials placed by the petitioner School. The learned Additional Government Pleader has also produced written instructions given by the Special Officer of the respondent Committee. In the said written instructions, while stating that there cannot be any comparison with the fee fixed by the earlier Committee, the Special Officer of the respondent Committee has stated as under: "However, by virtue of inflation and without considering the earlier fixation as infallible, this Committee is prepared to reconsider the matter afresh on merits as per the direction of the Hon'ble High Court." The learned Additional Government Pleader sought further time to file counter in the writ petition as there are batch of cases pending challenging the orders passed by the Fee Fixation Committee. 9. 9. The following tabulated statement will demonstrate that the fee fixed by the respondent committee is lesser than the fee, which the petitioner was hitherto collecting:- II Committee Division Bench III Committee Mr.Justice 15% enhancement as Mr.Justice K.Raviraja per High Court order Singaravelu Pandian Classes Fees (Rs.) Fees (Rs.) Fees (Rs.) LKG & 6750 7765 7500 UKG Std I-V 7500 8625 8500 Std VI-VIII 8550 9835 9550 II Committee Division Bench III Committee Std IX & X 9400 10810 10150 Std XI & 11950 13742 10500 XII 10. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that on account of the fee fixed by the committee, which is impugned in this writ petition, the petitioner institution would be unable to conduct the classes and offer all facilities as being offered to the students and they should be permitted to collect fee, which they were collecting for the previous year till the writ petition is heard and disposed of finally. 11. The submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner merits consideration and therefore, we are of the view that the petitioner institution is entitled for an interim protection till the writ petition is heard and disposed of on merits. 12. Accordingly, there will be an interim direction permitting the petitioner institution to collect the fee fixed by the committee headed by Justice K.Raviraja Pandian together with 15% increase until further orders. 13. Petitioner school shall duly publish in the Notice Board about the fee fixed by the Committee headed by Justice S.R.Singharavelu and also the fee permitted to be collected as per the interim direction indicating the difference and also issue receipt showing the fee fixed by Justice S.R.Singharavelu Committee and the fee permitted to be collected as per the interim direction and the difference thereon and such collection shall be subject to the result of the writ petition. The respondent shall file counter within three weeks. Post on 19.07.2013 along with the batch matters.